Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2007/Candidates/DragonFire1024/questions

2007 board elections
Election notice FAQ Candidate presentations Endorsements Vote Results
Organization
Election committee Candidate presentation guidelines Translations Coordinators Current requests Quick translation

To ask me questions about my candidacy, please post your question in the Discussion section below. I can only read in English so try your best :-) DragonFire1024 05:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Candidacy Questions

How should the board be constituted?

What is your opinion on how the board should be constituted? Do you think it should exclusively be composed of editors of our projects? If so, rather elected or appointed? Do you think we should have some people external to our community? Brian ^{Wikinews / Talk} 06:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I think being an editor of a project makes a huge difference when running for a Baord position. The election is to the Board of Trustees and if someone is not known on at least one project, how can someone be trusted? I am for anonymous editing, but that lacks the trust the community needs for postions of major decision making.

People should be elected. The community/people have a say in who should represent them. If they are choosing an individual(s) to represent the Foundation, they should have a say in who those individuals are.

External members can be good, but again run the risk of trust among the editors/contributers of the Wikimedia projects. As per representation, I think that each project should at least have one user/editor/contributer willing to represent to goings on in the world of their Wikis. DragonFire1024 06:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

• Do you see your lack of ability to speak many languages as a possible problem in carrying out board duties? Chacor 12:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Possibly. But it also depends on the situation. I currently work with quite a few users whose first language is not English. I do believe that the language barrier among the Wikis is somewhat of an issue, and the efforts for translating could be better. But I am always willing to learn.

I can understand some small Spanish as I had been learning it in school for a few years but I am not fluent in it. DragonFire1024 21:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free images and other media

Hi DragonFire1024. What are your opinions on the use of non-free images and other non-free media on Wikimedia Foundation projects? Should they be used at all, or disallowed completely? What are your opinions on this 23 March board resolution regarding licensing? Picaroon (Talk) 20:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The use of non-free images is a pretty big discussion right now. Images across all projects should be free. However, with that said, a news agency, like Wikinews, cannot have only free images. For a news agency to be able to report the news at the time, an image that is available as fair use may be the only available image that shows a specific event that is related to the story. Also many users have requested permission from copyright holders to use an image on a certain project/article and that image usually cannot be replaced.

While I understand the need and support the need for 100% free images, in the terms of news reporting, its just not 100% possible, but the attempt to obtain a free image, has to be made whenever possible. DragonFire1024 21:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Change

Hi Jason,

What is the top 3 things you want to have changed in the current strategy of the foundation? Thanks, Effeietsanders 21:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Good question :-) One: The board needs to work better with the members/users/contributers of all the Wikis. When it comes to decision making and policy change, the communities should be involved as much as possible.

Two: The Foudation should encourage more efficient ways of collecting and distributing the information we provide to the world. The board should encourage the collaboration and help in the collaboration of certain issues/articles/information on all Wikis as opposed to just one or two. The more work we can do as a whole, the better the Wikis will be. After all, we are all part of a Wiki and all part of the foundation.

Three: The Foundation needs to look at all the Wikis and realize that every Wiki needs the same attention and consideration when it comes to decision making. No one Wiki should be "neglected" in any way and all Wikis should receive the same treatment. We are all equal as we are all striving to provide the most up-to-date information to the world. Every Wiki should be treated as equal. DragonFire1024 22:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Added Value

Hi Jason,

What kind of value do you add to the current set of boardmembers in the area of Legal, Financial, Accounting etc expertise? Thanks, Effeietsanders 21:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I am no expert in any field really. I can say that in terms of gathering information I am very good at and very resourceful in getting information as well.

I am not a lawyer or an accountant, but do know my way around some laws like small issues with copyright laws in the US.

I think my skill as a journalist is very helpful as I am always reading information that could provide knowledge to someone who my not know about a certain situation. I am very very good with computers, the internet and information gathering.

Sorry if this is not a good answer...but this was a tough question! :) DragonFire1024 22:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ads

What are you views on advertisements on Wikimedia projects? Would you support a resolution that forced Wikimedia projects to use ads? Would you support a resolution that gave projects the right to vote on the use of advertisements? Would you support a resolution that forbid the user of advertisements? Mets501 02:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

At this time Advertisements are not required nor needed. Our fund raisers are generally successful and donations to the Foundation are always accepted on a regular basis. I think that if ads were placed on one project, then they should exist on every project. But again, at this time I do not support advertisements. DragonFire1024 03:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

So I'll assume you would not support a resolution that gave projects the right to vote on the use of advertisements. Fair enough. Thanks. —METS501 (talk) 05:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

At this time no. It would require more than one or two ads to be placed on the projects various pages. The Board/Foundation should be in control of where ads are placed and when and for what reason. DragonFire1024 05:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Flagged revisions

What is your view on the use of flagged revisions to help prevent vandalism from appearing before it is reverted and the extension's possible use to mark "quality" versions which would display by default even instead of the stable (non-vandalized) version? —METS501 (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have seen this only recently, as we do not have this kind of thing on en.Wikinews. Personally I am for it. Vandalism is a constant problem on every wiki and in some cases, on smaller projects, mass amounts of vandalism occur with very little fast and simple ways for them to clean it up.

Well unless vandalized edits are removed VIA oversight, then yes "quality" or good faith edits should be marked as such to let others know that what they are seeing is not vandalism. Not all edits, although may seem to be vandalism, aren't and in many cases are just an issue with the "language barrier." DragonFire1024 05:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Branding, business developer, GHGs.

1. What are your thoughts on Wikimedia branding?
2. and the foundation's hiring of a business developer?
3. How would you vote on the board about the foundation reducing or offsetting anthropogenic greenhouse gases, e.g. power used by hardware, flights, etc.?

Thanks. -- Jeandré, 2007-06-13t11:17z

1. Great Idea. I think that branding is a way to get the name of the WMF and its projects "out there."
2. As the foundation and its projects grow, more things need to be done. More Ideas are implemented, donations get larger etc etc. We need someone to do that work. If this person can help with those issues, then I support that hiring.
3. I think anything that helps our environment and the world such as the reduction of fossil fuels and greenhouse gases and the reliance on large amounts of electricity, is excellent, and I would support the WMF in its quest to help the environment whenever possible. DragonFire1024 18:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
   • What do you mean by Great idea, on question 1? To which idea are you referring? A lot of ideas and things are said in what Eric Moeller calls "Wikimedia brand survey".Hillgentleman 13:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Well in terms of marketing for example (as listed in the survey): 4.1: Should the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters license the project brands to makers of games, gadgets, toys, etc.? RE: to that being a good Idea as it would get the names of the project(s) out there and more known to people. We should also, at the same time work to protect those "brand(ings)" while trying to promote them as well. DragonFire1024 20:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)